Advanced Search

Author Topic: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts  (Read 1171 times)

03 April , 2026, 05:19:28 PM
Read 1171 times

Offline bashandy

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

  • 305
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 6

    • Coptic Pen
Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« on: 03 April , 2026, 05:19:28 PM »
I have been reflecting on the 20th century Coptic texts, trying to analyse them. It turns out that they are different from their predecessors because we are not talking about the same language and each has different reference points. There is Coptic language as attested in Coptic literature (Bible, hagiographies, martyrologies, epistolography, liturgical and non-liturgical texts) and there is a revival attempt of something different, I'll call it Neo-Coptic which relies on the grammar of other languages. For example:

1. ⲛⲁⲛⲉ ⲧⲟⲟⲩⲓ a neologism emerging 20th century. It reflects migration from the understanding of ⲛⲁⲛⲉ— as adjectivial verb (Mallon, 1904), verb (Crum, 1939), verboid (Layton 2007), etc. trying to repackage it as an adjective.. The rationale does not lie in Coptic language, the rationale lies  in French, English and Arabic languages with their terms of bonjour, good morning, صباح الخير. 
This reflects colonial influence in understanding and interpreting the language, trying to mold it to fit into constructs that are alien to it. There are two issues, treating a verb as an adjective and using Coptic as a bunch of words to try to convey a greeting that was not used in Coptic. This replaces traditional greetings in favour of Francophone style greetings.


2. ϩⲁⲛⲁⲧⲟⲟⲩⲓ (ϩⲁ.ⲛⲁ.ⲧⲟⲟⲩⲓ) an attested term with known meaning (Crum, 1939), and etymology (Steindorf, 1904), and  representation of  το πρωί, and Sahidic ⲛ̅ϣⲱⲣⲡ, as well as clear internal meanings in the Bible and hagiographies.
Yet the meaning and the parsing , is reinterpreted outside Coptic and  through the lens of one Arabic version stating الغدوات which creates ⲁⲧⲟⲟⲩⲓ as a consequence (Labib, 1611 AM). This reflects hyperregulation of Coptic trying to reinterpret a term based on assumptions made from outside the language.


3. ⲡⲓⲛⲟϫⲛ̀ⲓⲱⲧ (great father), is repackaged as grandfather. The rationale does not lie in Coptic language. It is in thesaurus of English language, and the French and English terms 'grandpa, grandfather'.

In these examples, the root of the issue is using French, Arabic and English to dictate how Coptic is interpreted and how it should be used. In other words, Coptic is being remodelled to fit  external linguistic codes.

So, the discussions are between Coptic language and a Neo-Coptic hybrid lingo that demonstrate linguistic transfer, code-mixing, calques, grammatical Trojan horses, and relexification (De-Hellinisation and borrowing from other languages). In essence, the Neo-Coptic lingo is not trying to revive Coptic language, but rather trying to re-engineer a lanaguge, or speak French, English & Arabic using Coptic words.
« Last Edit: 04 April , 2026, 12:02:43 PM by bashandy »
ⲧⲁⲁⲥ ⲛⲧⲁⲅⲟⲣⲁ ⲛⲧⲉ ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ ⲛⲣⲉⲙⲛⲭⲏⲙⲓ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

23 August , 2026, 06:48:25 PM
Reply #1

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1174
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 17

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #1 on: 23 August , 2026, 06:48:25 PM »
Quote
using Coptic as a bunch of words to try to convey a greeting that was not used in Coptic. This replaces traditional greetings in favour of Francophone style greetings.
What are these traditional greetings though? Do we have greetings that are not borrowed from Greek?

Yesterday at 04:18:56 AM
Reply #2

Offline bashandy

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

  • 305
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 6

    • Coptic Pen
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #2 on: Yesterday at 04:18:56 AM »
Initial Greetings
ⲭⲉⲣⲉ,ⲭⲁⲓⲣⲉⲧⲉ12: Greetings (sing. & pl.)
ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲁ̇ⲧⲉⲧⲉⲛⲓ, ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲁⲕⲓ ̀ , ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲁ ̀ ̇ⲣⲉⲓ, ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲁⲕⲓ ̀ ̀ϣⲁⲣⲟⲛ3
: Welcome (pl.), welcome
(sing. m.), welcome (sing. f.).
ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲉ̇ⲣⲟⲕ1.1: Welcome, you
ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲉ̇ⲣⲟ1.1: Welcome, you (sing. f.)
ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲉ̇ⲣⲱⲧⲉⲛ1.1: Welcome, you (pl.)
ⲁⲕⲧⲁⲓⲟⲓ ⲉ̇ⲙⲁϣⲱ ⲁⲕⲓ̀ⲉ̇ϧⲟⲩⲛ ϧⲁⲑⲟⲩⲁϩⲥⲟⲓ ⲙ̀ⲡⲁⲏⲓ4
: You honoured me, you entered under the
roof of my house
ⲁⲩϯⲭⲉⲣⲉ ⲛⲁϥ4
: They greeted him
ⲧϩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ ⲛⲱⲧⲉⲛ4
: Peace be with you
ⲙⲁⲧⲁⲓⲉ ⲛⲓⲣⲉⲙⲛ̀ϫⲱⲓⲗⲓ ⲉⲫⲙⲁ ϫⲉⲁⲩⲓ̀ϧⲁⲑⲟⲩⲁϩⲥⲟⲓ ⲙ̀ⲡⲁⲏⲓ5
: Honour the stranger for they came under the roof of my house
ⲫⲁⲓ ⲟⲩⲛ ⲉⲓⲟⲩⲁϣϥ ⲙⲏⲧⲓ ϩⲁⲣⲁ ⲁⲓⲓⲣⲓ ϧⲉⲛ ⲟⲩⲁⲥⲓⲁⲓ ̀
6
: Wishing then, this, did I act in levity?
How are you?
ⲟⲩ ⲡⲉⲧⲁϥϣⲱⲡⲓ ⲙ̀ⲙⲱⲧⲉⲛ4
: What happened to you? (pl.)
ⲁⲕⲉⲣⲟⲩ7
: How are you?
ⲟⲩ ⲡⲉⲧϣⲟⲡ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ8
: What is happening to you? sing. m.
ⲟⲩ ⲡⲉⲧϣⲟⲡ ⲡⲁϣⲏⲣⲓ9
: What is my son
ⲟⲩ ⲡⲉⲧϣⲟⲡ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟ1.1: What is happening to you? sing. f.
ϯⲟⲩⲟϫ1.1: I am fine
ϯⲣⲁϣⲓ10: I am happy
ϯϧⲟⲥⲓ11: I am tired
ϯϣⲱⲛⲓ12: I am sick
ϯⲉⲣϩⲟϯ13: I am afraid
ⲡⲓⲉ̇ϫⲱⲣϩ ⲧⲏⲣϥ ⲁⲛⲁⲓϥ ⲛ̀ϧⲟⲥⲓ14: All the night, we toiled
Affirmative and Negative
ⲛ̀ⲑⲟⲕⲟⲩⲣⲉⲙⲛ̀ⲭⲏⲙⲓ15: Are you Egyptian?
ⲁ̇ϩⲁ16 : Yes
ⲥⲉ 54: Yes (indeed)
ⲥⲉ ⲟⲛⲧⲱⲥ 17: Yes, indeed
ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲛ1.1: No
ⲙ̀ⲫⲱⲣ18: By no means
ⲛ̀ⲑⲟⲕ ⲡⲉⲧⲁⲕϫⲟⲥ (ⲉ̇ⲃⲟⲗ)19: It is you that said (you said)
ⲧⲉⲕϫⲓⲛⲥⲁϫⲓ ⲟⲩⲱⲛϩ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ20: Your speech/accent shows you up (gives you away)
ⲁ̇ϩⲁ ⲁ̇ⲛⲟⲕⲡⲉ4
: Yes, it is me
ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲛ ⲛ̀ⲛⲉⲥϣⲱⲡⲓ4
: No, it will never be
Ϯⲛⲁⲉ̇ⲣⲟⲩⲱ̇ ⲛⲁⲕⲁⲛ ϫⲉⲕⲁⲕⲱⲥ ⲁⲕϣⲓⲛⲓ54: I will not answer  you as you asked badly
ⲧⲁⲁⲥ ⲛⲧⲁⲅⲟⲣⲁ ⲛⲧⲉ ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ ⲛⲣⲉⲙⲛⲭⲏⲙⲓ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

Yesterday at 10:59:22 AM
Reply #3

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1174
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 17

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #3 on: Yesterday at 10:59:22 AM »
ⲭⲉⲣⲉ. ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ, ϩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ are all Greek words.

The sentences related to greeting a visitor are great but I want to know about the general greetings.
Do we have in Coptic general greetings (like hello, good morning, welcome) that don't have Greek words in them?

Yesterday at 12:56:35 PM
Reply #4

Offline bashandy

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

  • 305
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 6

    • Coptic Pen
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #4 on: Yesterday at 12:56:35 PM »
I am not generally worried about the etymology of words and expressions so long that they were attested and used by our ancestors

Greek loanwords have been used for centuries, tjey were assimilated and 'Copticised' to an extent that a native speaker of Coptic language might not have recognised if a word was a Greek loanword. These are all well attested expressions.

In the Bible translation certain Greek words were translated into Coptic using other Greek loanwords, as the other words were more familiar. In that sense, Greek loanwords were effectively Coptic words like saying 'alo' in a phone call in Egyptian Arabic, or bye bye, actually saying something else would sound a bit too formal or even alien.

There is a greeting used in Coptic epistolography which does not have Greek loanwords which is ϯϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲉ̀ⲣⲟⲕ I greet you, there is also ϯⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ

There's also ⲡϩⲙⲟⲧ ⲛⲱⲧⲉⲛⲛⲉⲙ ⲧϩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ ⲉ̀ⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛⲫϯ ⲡⲉⲛⲓⲱⲧ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲉⲛ⳪̅ ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ ⲡⲭ̅ⲥ̅ which is a standard opening formula in Pauline epistles. It has only one loanword.

There is also the famous ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ which was used as hello / bye according to ⲡⲓϩⲩⲅⲟⲩⲙⲉⲛⲟⲥ ϣⲉⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲓⲥⲁⲁⲕ where he compared it to the Egyptian Arabic term العواف There are other terms in older stages of Egyptian language eg Ankh wedja seneb (𓋹𓍑𓋴 ꜥnḫ wḏꜢ snb) but, I am not keen on using or translating something from a different era lest it sounds like an archaic expression superimposed on Coptic like using عمت صباحا in contemporary Egyptian Arabic.

Happy to hear your thoughts on the topic
ⲧⲁⲁⲥ ⲛⲧⲁⲅⲟⲣⲁ ⲛⲧⲉ ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ ⲛⲣⲉⲙⲛⲭⲏⲙⲓ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

Yesterday at 01:39:52 PM
Reply #5

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1174
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 17

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #5 on: Yesterday at 01:39:52 PM »
Quote
ϯϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲉ̀ⲣⲟⲕ I greet you
I would translate this as: "I am asking about you" rather than "I greet you".

I could be wrong of course. If you have a reference please share. My dictionary doesn't mention it.

Quote
there is also ϯⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ
I'd translate this as "I worship you" or "I bow down to you". We say it often in the mass prayer. "We worship you Christ with your good father and holy spirit"
ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ ⲱ ⲡⲭ︦ⲥ︦ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲉⲕⲓⲱⲧ  ⲛ̀ⲁⲅⲁⲧⲟⲥ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲓⲛⲉⲛⲩⲙⲁ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ
Quote
There's also ⲡϩⲙⲟⲧ ⲛⲱⲧⲉⲛⲛⲉⲙ ⲧϩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ ⲉ̀ⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛⲫϯ ⲡⲉⲛⲓⲱⲧ ⲛⲉⲙⲡⲉⲛ⳪̅ ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ ⲡⲭ̅ⲥ̅


Right but I am looking for a normal greeting that Egyptians - regardless of their religion- would use to greet each others.
Quote
There is also the famous ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ which was used as hello / bye
I know ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ means bye but I did not know it could also be used as greeting.

العواف is also said when leaving never as a greeting.
Please do correct me if I said something wrong or inaccurate.
I just feel like surely Egyptians greeted each others prior to Christianity. How come we don't know any general greeting that is not rooted in Christianity.

Yesterday at 04:50:03 PM
Reply #6

Offline bashandy

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

  • 305
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 6

    • Coptic Pen
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #6 on: Yesterday at 04:50:03 PM »
Thank you for your reply. It is a valid enquiry. I guess in older stages of Egyptian expressions like ]ꜥnḫ wḏꜢ snb or Im htp might have been common, but there are no attestations for their use in Coptic
Quote
I would translate this as: "I am asking about you" rather than "I greet you".
According to Crum's Coptic Dictionary (1939) ϯϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲉ̀ⲣⲟⲕ means I greet you, which matches with the opening formula of multiple Coptic correspondence letters. It might have a literal meaning, but, effectively the meaning is I greet you. ϯϣⲓⲛⲓ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ would be I ask you
Quote
I'd translate this as "I worship you" or "I bow down to you". We say it often in the mass prayer. "We worship you Christ with your good father and holy spirit"
ⲧⲉⲛⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ ⲙ̀ⲙⲟⲕ ⲱ ⲡⲭ︦ⲥ︦ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲉⲕⲓⲱⲧ  ⲛ̀ⲁⲅⲁⲧⲟⲥ ⲛⲉⲙ ⲡⲓⲛⲉⲛⲩⲙⲁ ⲉⲑⲟⲩⲁⲃ
According to Crum's Coptic Dictionary (1939) ⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ means greet, or worship
Quote
I know ⲟⲩϫⲁⲓ means bye but I did not know it could also be used as greeting.
This was according to ⲡⲓϩⲩⲅⲟⲩⲙⲉⲛⲟⲥ ϣⲉⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲓⲥⲁⲁⲕ in Copto-Arabica curriculum, I have not come across this as an initial greeting, however, in some cultures, greetings/bye are one word.
Quote
I just feel like surely Egyptians greeted each others prior to Christianity. How come we don't know any general greeting that is not rooted in Christianity.
Most of these greetings except for the Pauline greeting are not Christian, they have been used by non-Christians in correspondence. Greek loanwords predated Christianity by centuries. Alexander the Great conquered Egypt in 332 BCE. At that time, Coptic was virtually non-existent. Demotic was more prevalent. By the time Christianity enters Egypt Coptic as a linguistic stage was still developing. Some historians, argue that as Demotic (as a script) was fading out, and Coptic was still developing, there was a small stage of collective agraphia, where people spoke Egyptian, but wrote mainly in Greek because Egyptian scripts were not known to the masses.
By the time, Coptic was a mature stage/phase of the language and outgrew Old Coptic, the Hellenistic civilisation was dominant in the old world, and many Greek loanwords, became part of the vernacular, not the elites, just anyone using Coptic language. It would possibly sound unusual for a Copt at that time to differentiate between words based on their etymology whether they came from Demotic or Greek. Hence, constructs like ⲕⲁⲗⲱⲥ ⲁⲧⲉⲧⲉⲛⲓ̇ or ⲭⲉⲣⲉ ⲛⲁⲕ, ⲧϩⲓⲣⲏⲛⲏ ⲛⲁⲕ feature Greek loanwords within a Coptic phrase that abides by Coptic grammar and Greek loanwords are fossilised in a certain structure usually nominative state (Greek endings tend to vary depending on whether the word was a nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, etc.), this does not happen in Greek loanwords, they get fossilised and treated like a Coptic word.
For example, in Egyptian Arabic there are multiple loanwords eg Alo, hi, hello, bye bye, OK, tamam, effendim, agzakhana, oda, shanta, baltagy, balta, police, serenga, antibiotic, mobile, merci, fatura, balcona, vizita, veranda, salon, latte, cappuccino, shai, tarabeza, gollash, macarona, barlaman, logha, dostoor, qanun etc. These are all loanwords, that entered both Egyptian Arabic and some entered classical Arabic. One might want to try to explore Egyptian Arabic before Ottoman/Turkish, French, English, Italian influences, but then, one is bound to go back in history 600 years or so.

More or less, it is likely that a situation like this existed in Coptic, these terms (with Greek loanwords) seem to have been used since the dawn of Coptic as we know it. If one wants to explore Egyptian language before any Greek loanwords, then that would be ultimately before Coptic language itself, possibly Demotic would be a better candidate.
Otherwise, Greek (loanwords, expressions, rhetorical style, alphabet) are part of the package and parcel of Coptic language (part of the DNA of Coptic language if you may).




ⲧⲁⲁⲥ ⲛⲧⲁⲅⲟⲣⲁ ⲛⲧⲉ ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ ⲛⲣⲉⲙⲛⲭⲏⲙⲓ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

Yesterday at 05:41:54 PM
Reply #7

Offline Admin

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • 1174
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 17

    • Ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #7 on: Yesterday at 05:41:54 PM »
Thanks, that was very informative.

Yes Demotic is a better choice but since it doesn't write vowels, its not possible to know how the words were pronounced.

Perhaps doing literal translation from Demotic to Coptic would give us more authentic greetings that are far from the Neo-Coptic ones?
 I understand your point about using Greek and its valid.
But for me personally I want to be as close as possible to Egyptian that was spoken when Egypt was independent (i.e the late period).

Yesterday at 10:26:21 PM
Reply #8

Offline bashandy

  • Administrator

  • *****

  • ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ

  • 305
    Posts

  • People said thank you: 6

    • Coptic Pen
Re: Grammatical Trojan horses in Neo-Coptic revival attempts
« Reply #8 on: Yesterday at 10:26:21 PM »
Thank you for your reply. There are a few caveats that I did not highlight.
Quote
Demotic is a better choice
Demotic is not a better choice, it is a different choice. It is a valid one, just different. Demotic has loanwords from Aramaic, Persian and other languages depending on the time. It is difficult to find a point in time where any language could be described as 'purer'. There are possible loanwords that came with the Hyksos, so the chase for the purest in that perspective, would lead to a different stage of the language thousands of years before Coptic. This is not specific to Coptic only. Any living language exchanged words with other languages, it is a sign of life.
Whether a language has multiple loanwords or not, is not relevant in general to the language. A living language is about communication between people, and hence if speakers of this living language agree to use ⲭⲁⲓⲣⲉ, ⲭⲉⲣⲉ instead of im htp or others it is a valid choice.
Quote
Perhaps doing literal translation from Demotic to Coptic would give us more authentic greetings
I appreciate this is a personal choice, but greetings with Greek loanwords are equally authentic as ones (if they existed in Coptic) without, as both were used by native speakers of the language and they adopted that. There is a differentiation to be made between the conquest of Alexander the Great, which is military conquest, and the philosophical, literary, scientific, medical, pharmaceutical, chemical cross cultural civilisation which would have happened even in the absence of the conquest.
While, Coptic language has loanwords from Akkadian, Syriac, Ge'ez, Hebrew, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Farsi and possibly from Nobiin and Tamazight, the grammar and the language itself by far and large is an Egyptian language.
Apart from linguistics, one cannot say that the Egyptian chariot is less authentic than a spear because the chariot was introduced by the Hyksos. I think the concept that 'Greek loanwords are less authentic' or something to be looked upon with a view to finding a 'better' alternative, is rooted in the 20th century ideas about nationalism, but, Copts themselves, they did not seem to be generally concerned with where each word comes from, they have adopted their alphabet from Greek. I would not consider that the Coptic alphabet to be less authentic than the Demotic letters. As with alphabet, greetings have been used for hundreds of years by Copts in that sense
I am satisfied to use the language as it was used and written with no modification, or selectivity with respect to words. ⲭⲉⲣⲉ is equally authentic as im htp. I wold not lean on words that did not survive in Coptic as this bears the risk of miscommunication, as not everyone would understand from where this word came. Also, it could inadvertently lead to asynchronicity, where one is using a greeting that is about a thousand year older than the rest of the text.
By contrast, the Neo-Coptic pidgin, focused on the vocabulary, but neglected what really makes Coptic language Coptic which is its grammar, expressions, rhetorical style, and its overall connection with this literary heritage under the banner of modernisation which is invalid in dead language (or dormant as some prefer to say).
If I could learn to read, write, speak and listen to Coptic then way native speakers did, that would be enough for me. I do not judge how they used their language or whether they borrowed a few hundred words or not.
« Last Edit: Today at 12:07:45 AM by bashandy »
ⲧⲁⲁⲥ ⲛⲧⲁⲅⲟⲣⲁ ⲛⲧⲉ ⲧⲉⲛⲁⲥⲡⲓ ⲛⲣⲉⲙⲛⲭⲏⲙⲓ ϩⲓⲧⲉⲛ ⲡⲉϣⲉⲛϯ ⲑⲉⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ


 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19